Biggest winners and losers in NJ Democrats’ new school aid plan

TRENTON — More school districts would get more money under a competing school funding formula put forward by state Democratic lawmakers. Although many districts would also lose money.

The only question is how the state will pay for it all. It's an important point because Gov. Phil Murphy, whose administration released its own school aid budget in March, and Democratic Senate President Steven Sweeney have threatened a government shutdown if both sides don't agree on a spending plan by the end of this month.

The Democratic school aid proposal, advanced Tuesday by the budget committees in the state Senate and Assembly, would add $348 million to school funding, for a total $8.428 billion. Large aid increases would be afforded to districts that have been chronically underfunded under the state’s existing formula.

Find your district in the charts below.

The legislative proposal is $65 million more than Murphy's plan. But unlike the administration's formula, which would not penalize any district, the legislative proposal would slash aid to 190 districts.

While Murphy's proposal would have provided at least $1 million more to 50 school districts, the legislative proposal would boost aid by at least a million for 86 districts.

And not just the poorest districts, which have always received the lion's share of state aid (and still would.)

Woodbridge would get another $4.9 million, instead of just $1.4 million under Murphy's plan.

Edison would get an additional $4.27 million, instead of just $775,000.

North Brunswick would get an additional $4.23 million, instead of just $731,000.

Manville would get an additional $3.2 million, instead of just $302,000.

Robbinsville's state aid would increase by 117 percent, more than doubling by $3.6 million rather than the $156,000 increase proposed by the administration.

The biggest losers would be Jersey City, which would lose $3.5 million or 1 percent. Glassboro would lose 11 percent, or $1.85 million. Lakewood, which has struggled to develop spending plans without asking municipal and state leaders for extra infusions of cash, would lose $1.3 million or 5 percent.